Jump to content

Jace, Extat

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Jace, Extat

  1. 1 hour ago, DMC said:

    You’re gonna have to up your game to get paid for it.

    It's not a game, but an art... :pimp:

    1 hour ago, A True Kaniggit said:

    Ummm. Do you not know your fellow posters? 

    None of us are getting paid!

    I do this because I enjoy it.

    Yeah, me too. Getting kicked around by y'all once in a while helps keep the AI Chatbot that runs my brain from getting too full of itself. 

  2. 1 minute ago, Conflicting Thought said:


    iran would not have responded if israel didnt first attacked the consulate, thats just the reality, its a fact.

    That's a fair point, and I think evidences that Netanyahu is playing an untenable hand quite adeptly. 

    That consulate strike was fucking diabolical. Iran had to do something- Had To. And they had to do something dramatic, something unprecedented, because nobody had ever struck an embassy like that before.

    And now you have your casus belli for all-out war with the true villain of the region that could keep you in power for years despite a disapproval rating of 70-fucking-percent. 

    Netanyahu may be a dirtbag, but I'll be damned if he's not sharp.

  3. 9 minutes ago, Altherion said:

    Where did you see this? I saw a report that she underwent surgery and was in the ICU, but not that she died.

    I was watching an ABC News livestream and the reporter in Israel said she'd died.

  4. 1 minute ago, Tears of Lys said:

    Was she one of the Israeli Bedouin?  Poor kid - wrong place, wrong time.  :( 

    Yes, according to what I saw last night. That's a sick twist of fate right there.

  5. 24 minutes ago, Gorn said:


    Iran did everything in its power to turn Israel into a pile of rubble and to cause major casualties. The value of missiles they spent is a major part of their military budget. They failed not because of their "restraint", but because of quality of Israel's air defences.

    Yeah, I don't know about this whole "It was designed to be defeated" rationale for the attack. Iran took the best shot they're capable of and violated the airspace of at least two countries in the process.

    Thank God for Israeli and Allied defense capabilities, not for supposed Iranian restraint.

  6. 4 hours ago, The Anti-Targ said:

    I doubt there is a connection. There are plenty of non-nuclear countries who treat minorities like shit, and who in the world would do anything militarily to help the Uygurs if China didn't have nukes? Iran doesn't have nukes (so far as we know) and the world has done jack shit to put a stop to its pogrom against the Baha'is that's been going on for over 40 years.


  7. 7 minutes ago, JGP said:

    Entitled isn't how I'd have put it. More like the World seems, in majority, full of chickenshit piss babies that're tacitly ok with Putin doing more or less whatever the fuck he wants because of nuke rattling, so if another Nation feels they need them to electrify their fences against likewise aggressive Nations, go on then. Slay, girl.  


    But more nuclear nations just makes it more likely that bad actors can use them to deter intervention. To say nothing of the risk that some madman looks to use them offensively.

  8. 11 minutes ago, JGP said:


    I mean, the absolute fucking audacity asserting authority over who can and cannot [develop nuclear weapons] makes me shake my head. Fuck outa here.


    You think all peoples who can build such a thing are entitled to it? We're not talking about roller coasters or microwave ovens... We're talking about weapons that are designed to kill whole countries at a time.

  9. 37 minutes ago, JGP said:

    Putin has made an irrefutable argument regarding the value their possession however. Whether it's peace or The End, maybe the bomb would end all war... if every nation has them.



    You jest, but limited war is preferable to nuclear.

    37 minutes ago, Larry of the Lawn said:

    Let me rephrase.  You said :

    You've already established that "that world" is the 8 'rational' nations with nuclear weapons.  But I'm asking you is why has that been proven "viable"?  What does viable mean in this context?  Does it mean that this is what has happened so far?  Do you simply mean that nuclear weapons haven't been used since Hiroshima and Nagasaki?

    It has been proven viable, because despite too many close calls nobody has yet wanted to invite death for themselves and everybody they know. 

    Nuclear war is not a question or a thought exercise. It must not happen. So far, the powers that possess them have managed not to use them. That's a miracle, not proof that everybody else can have them too.

  10. So for the sake of what, "fairness"? For fairness you say take a structure that is already unsteady and apocalyptic and let it become moreso? 

    No, no, no! Hear yourself, Z. No man, no woman, and no body of persons on earth should hold the power to kill billions. The fact that 9 people already can is the most horrible thing to ever have happened on this planet. You can't really believe that adding more people to such a game is the correct answer. You can't believe such a thing- I refuse to accept that.

  11. 4 minutes ago, Larry of the Lawn said:

    "viable" doing a lot of work here.  What does viable mean in this context?  

    Astute question.

    Nuclear capacity being isolated to rational actors. And I include Kim as a rational actor. 

    Now that's not me saying that all nuclear-armed countries are guaranteed to be led by rational actors! Far from it! Each and every nation on earth armed with weapons is a danger of producing a madman that could end the world. That's why NO MORE get to join the club.

  12. 11 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

    Is the above tweet gone? And what is "state of agency"?

    Lol, I was sitting there like... "I've never heard of a State of Agency... but Wert is a trusted source. It must be very serious!"

    That gummy has definitely kicked in.

  13. 23 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

    The population that is more and more disenfranchised with each passing day and has no power and is barely allowed to vote if their skin is on the darker side? The powerless population? And not now but just you wait and watch Mango use the US military against its own citizens. Hell, the way the police is already militarised and free to shoot and kill people w/ no consequence, you’re one executive order away from the armed forces being used against people peacefully protesting. And who’s gonna say no? The most zealot and corrupt SCOTUS ever? :rofl:

    This sounds incredibly naive or misinformed to me, but maybe I’m just too cynical.

    This seems to fit better here, and if you want the truth I'll tell you that my inclination in this is to be inward-focused and reconstructive as a nation right now. That's what I'd like to do. 

    But the tiger's tail is caught, there's no wishmaking away America's unique capacity as a world agent. I can't make nobody have nukes. What I can advocate for is that nobody else gets them.

    And yes, I am aware that in the coming decades of resource scarcity and climate change that that means there is an effective Imperialising of the world to the benefit of the eight outgoing nuclear-armed states. 

    But that is a world that has proven, so far, viable. That viability must be enforced. America can do that. So we should. 

  14. 17 minutes ago, polishgenius said:



    Amy Coney Barrett is a symptom of the problem, not the actual problem. 


    2 minutes ago, Zorral said:

    The freakin' white christian nationalist dominionist -- some of whom are on the SCOTUS.  Where the eff have you been?  They are all right out there blathering about making this nation a xtian nationalist state and if you don't think they'll massacre and have inquisitions, you are in lalalaland.

    Yeah, but no. Not really. 

    C'mon, guys. Yes, there are extreme political actors in U.S.A., some of whom are religiously driven. But they are outnumbered by some quantity in the population and have little chance of enacting national policy that can threaten the entire world. Their own creature, as you call Trump, did nothing to forward some Theocratic America Dream if you accept that reasonable people can differ about abortion.

    It's different in Iran.

    6 minutes ago, Werthead said:

    Some reports that some drones may have entered Jordanian airspace.

    Lebanon and Israel have confirmed full closure of their airspaces. US estimates that the first drones could reach Israeli airspace in around 30-40 minutes from now.

    Just ate an edible, should be kicking in right about then. Hoping to just see some fireworks as the drones (hopefully just the drones) are intercepted.

  15. Amy Coney Barrett is a weird religious kook by American standards. 

    But to pretend she is the Ayatollah is just absurd. It is perfectly reasonable to disagree about abortion, even to have a religious reason for doing so. 


  16. 30 minutes ago, Werthead said:


    So far only Iranian Shahed drones are reported overflying western and southern Iraq. But if Iran is planning ballistic missile strikes, they would not launch until the drones were close to their targets. Using drones alone might be a signal of both taking retaliatory action but not escalating insanely.

    Israel has now confirmed an attack is underway against its territory. It is deploying AA defences. US, Israeli and possibly UK aircraft may be deploying to intercept the drones, which have a 2-hour flight time from Iranian territory towards Israel.

    Some Iranian sources reporting cruise missile launches but no video confirmation. No ballistic missile strikes as yet.



  17. 5 minutes ago, polishgenius said:


    For someone so outwardly cynical this is surprisingly naive. 

    You literally had a guy try to stage a coup on behalf of the theocrats at the last election. 

    Are QAnon crazies and MAGA Heads theocrats? I wouldn't call them such.

    Trump is a cult of personality. It will die when he does.

    4 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

    What about a man who has never ever had a moderately good day? Because that’s the alternative.

    I mean, by God of course Biden is better than Trump. He's still less-than-reassuring at his present condition.

  18. 16 minutes ago, polishgenius said:


    To be fair though that's gonna happen anyway when America breaks apart. 

    America is much better off demographically than almost any country on Earth. You'll be waiting for this a long time.

    15 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

    But this theocracy already has nukes, and plenty of them. 
    Oh wait, you meant Iran! I thought you were talking about the US! 


    14 minutes ago, A True Kaniggit said:


    Bold 2: So America when Republicans are in charge?

    Ba dum tss. 

    There is a gulf of lightyears between a major party that courts religious voters and a regime specifically dedicated to a religious worldview that demands the killing of non-believers.

    17 minutes ago, A True Kaniggit said:

    Bold 1: Shit! I'm older than you are? No wonder my hair is so thin. :crying:


    Huzzah to the Young Millennials! Our hour of triumph is near! :P

    15 minutes ago, A True Kaniggit said:


    And I see no reason why President Biden could not lead the country against such a threat.


    Yeah... about that...

    Look, I appreciate Joe Biden. I think he did a great service to his country in 2020 and by all accounts he seems as good a man as a politician can be.

    But the best outcome I can forsee is that he wins reelection and then is replaced quickly by Kamala Harris as President. I don't like picking on him because he's old, but when the future of everything is at stake I can't feel confident in a man whose staff feels the need to hide him from public. It's not a nice reality to confront, but we have the systems we have. Some people fall apart as they age, it's just a fact of life, and a man whose best days are behind him is not who I want as the supreme executive on this planet. 

  • Create New...